On 07/06/2018 01:20 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:
On 07/05/2018 11:56 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
On 07/05/2018 02:48 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:
On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell <li...@michaelshell.org> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao <r...@stu.xidian.edu.cn> wrote:
Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix the
buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).
.........
And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.
...........
Cheers,
Mike
--
I did a git bisect on my system, but I couldn't make much sense of
the result. The commit it finally settled on didn't seem to have
anything to with acpi.
[quote]
Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[9af9b94068fb1ea3206a700fc222075966fbef14] x86/cpu/AMD: Handle SME
reduction in physical address size
Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap()
Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[7744ccdbc16f0ac4adae21b3678af93775b3a386] x86/mm: Add Secure Memory
Encryption (SME) support
[unquote]
I sent the result to the kernel acpi development list but never got
an answer. If someone else on this list wants to try, I can send him
my complete bisect logs.
--
Hazel
This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of
error messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them
because they are suppressed.
I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to
debug systemd, whatever I do....
Help?
I don't mean to be pedantic, but I really don't think you would run
into these types of problems using System V. Why not try that?
-- Bruce
Hi Bruce,
With System V there is - of course - no problem. The thing is that
systemd - if it runs well - is somewhat easier to use because of the use
of .service files.
I'll have to disagree that service files are easier. What I do agree
with is that they are more consistent among distros. The boot scripts
for System V are really quite easy to read and, if needed, write.
I also noticed that some packages are only shipping
.service(.in) files and have abandon the use of sysVinit files.
Then they are abandoning those distros that do not use systemd such as
the BSDs and Devuan. But those distros can easily add their own boot
scripts. I'll note that all the BLFS packages that need boot scripts
have them,
Combined
with the fact that most distributions have embraced systemd as their
primary or only init system let me believe that we are stuck with this
piece of ever growing mutation. And as LFS is a teaching ground, it
should - however reluctant - incorporated this too.
As a teaching tool, NOT using systemd is essential. There is far too
much done by systemd in an opaque manner that System V demonstrates and,
if desired,implemented in custom ways.
Also, the goal is that someone fire-up their basic hardware with a LFS
born OS, but for testing or use in VM's development is nowadays mostly
within the VM realm.
When I teach LFS in class, I always have the students use real HW,
There are too many things that VMs hide,
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style